'Social Issues' Move Forward In Congress

Washington--As bills to outlaw abortion and to end school busing
moved toward legislative action last week, the Senate approved a
measure endorsing voluntary prayer in public schools.

Senators voted to retain a provision, attached to a Justice
Department appropriation bill, that would prohibit the use of federal
funds to "obstruct the implementation of programs of voluntary prayer."
The measure had been passed by the House in September.

Action on the other proposals--which make up the so-called "social
issues" agenda of legislation promoting greater family choice in
education and Christian values for youth--is being pushed by
Congressional conservatives and pro-family lobbying groups.

The vote on the prayer issue--whichspokesmen for conservative groups
say is a "diluted" version of the bill they favor--represents the
closest any of the social-issues measures has come to enactment in this
session of Congress. Many of the bills had languished in committees
throughout last spring and summer, as Congressional leaders sought to
concentrate action on President Reagan's budget and tax-cut
measures.

In the Republican-controlled Senate, where most action on the bills
is expected to take place, Howard H. Baker of Tennessee, the majority
leader, has been trying to delay action on any social-issues bills
until all of the federal appropriations bills pass both chambers,
sometime late this year or early next year.

Jesse A. Helms, Republican of North Carolina, and J. Bennett
Johnston, Democrat of Louisiana, thwarted the majority leader's wishes
by attaching anti-busing riders to the Justice Department authorization
bill early last summer. Their moves prompted Lowell P. Weicker,
Republican of Connecticut, to launch a three-month filibuster of the
bill.

When the filibuster began to slow the budget process, Senator Baker
finally put the bill aside on Sept. 16. No further floor action was
taken on the social-issues bills until Nov. 2, when Senator Baker
permitted three bills introduced by Senator Helms--to allow prayer in
the schools, prohibit abortion, and ban busing--to be placed on the
calendar without approval by the appropriate committees.

The bills can be called up at any time, although Senator Baker still
insists that budgetary matters come first.

The majority leader is now being pressured by lobbyists and
conservative Senators to bring the social-issues proposals to the floor
for debate. Paul Weyrich, executive director of the Committee for the
Survival of a Free Congress, a pro-family group, said recently that
"it's evident that we are going to have to grapple with budget cuts and
economic issues for several years, not for part of one session. That
can no longer be used as an excuse. The time is right to move on these
issues."

Following is a roundup of recent action taken on the social-issues
bills:

Prayer in schools. The Senate-approved amendment to the funding bill
for the Justice Department was originally proposed in the House by
Robert S. Walker, Republican of Pennsylvania. John Howard, a Walker
aide, said the Congressman has attempted to attach the rider "to just
about every [education] appropriation bill since 1977."

The amendment is considered a mild one because it does not address
the constitutional issue of school prayer. It would merely prohibit the
use of Justice Department funds to challenge school boards that permit
prayer in public schools. The Justice Department has had virtually no
role in such litigation.

Second Amendment

The effect of the measure is further weakened by a second amendment,
proposed the day after the first one passed by Senator Weicker, an
opponent of school prayer. His proposal, which passed unanimously,
states that nothing in the Walker amendment "shall be interpreted as
the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise [of
religion]."

Gary L. Jarmin, project director of the Project Prayer Coalition--a
consortium of 65 Christian and pro-family groups--called the vote
on

the Walker amendment "a victory more in a symbolic sense than in a real
meaningful sense of moving to restore prayer. It has given the movement
a shot in the arm."

The legislative counsel to the American Civil Liberties Union, David
E. Landau, said the measure was "an inappropriate approach to the
problem. It is an attempt to overrule constitutional law not by
constitutional amendment but by legislation."

Mr. Jarmin said his group is supporting a school-prayer bill
sponsored by Representative Philip M. Crane, Republican of Illinois.
That measure, similar to the bill sponsored by Senator Helms, would
remove school-prayer cases from the jurisdiction of all federal courts,
including the U.S. Supreme Court. Because the House Judiciary
subcommittee to which the measure was assigned has refused to act on
the bill, Mr. Crane has filed a petition to force the measure to the
House floor.

School busing. Of the more than 20 pieces of anti-busing legislation
awaiting Congressional action, the bill that would have the most
dramatic consequences for school desegregation efforts was scheduled to
be reported to the Senate floor by the Judiciary Committee late last
week.

Proposed by Senator Orrin G.

Hatch, Republican of Utah, the bill would not only prohibit federal
courts from ordering busing to alleviate racial discrimination, but
would also permit courts to review existing court orders for busing,
allowing federal judges to vacate such orders.

Less Drastic Measure

A less drastic measure, sponsored by Senator John P. East,
Republican of North Carolina, was reported to the Judiciary Committee
last week by the Subcommittee on the Separation of Powers, of which he
is chairman. The full committee has not yet scheduled action on the
bill.

In the House, a petition to force an anti-busing bill sponsored by
Ronald M. Mottl, Democrat of Ohio, out of a Judiciary subcommittee now
has 200 of the 218 signatures necessary to bring the measure to the
floor.

Abortion. Numerous anti-abortion bills, both statutes and
constitutional amendments, have been the focus of attention. Beginning
Oct. 5, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution held a
series of hearings on an amendment that would establish a "two-tier"
process for regulating abortion. The proposal would allow Congress to
set a national standard for abortion, with states permitted to adopt
more restrictive rules. Less restrictive state abortion laws would not
be permitted, however. The bill--which is sponsored by the
subcommittee's chairman, Senator Hatch--received the support last week
of Catholic lobbying groups. The National Conference of Bishops and the
U.S. Catholic Conference, whose representatives had been undecided on
the Hatch proposal, finally granted the Senator their support.

Three Other Amendments

Three other right-to-life amendments, all of them introduced by
Senate Republicans, await action. Jake Garn of Utah and Charles E.
Grassley of Iowa have introduced bills that would permit abortions only
when a mother's life is in danger. Another, sponsored by Senator Helms,
would protect the rights of the unborn from the moment of conception.
Such amendments would require ratification by the legislatures of 38
states.

A statute sponsored by Senator Helms and approved by the
Subcommittee on the Separation of Powers also would mandate that life
begins at conception. It would permit review of state abortion statutes
only by the Supreme Court.

In the House, the so-called Hyde amendment, which last year
restricted the use of federal Medicaid funds for abortion of
pregnancies resulting from rape or incest, was tightened this year. The
current version, attached to an education appropriations bill that
passed the House on Oct. 6, would permit Medicaid funds to pay for
abortion only to save the life of a mother. That bill is now awaiting
action in the Senate.

Vol. 01, Issue 12

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.